Dark energy transition between quintessence and phantom regimes - an equation of state analysis

UB-ECM-PF 05/09, IRB-TH-17/05

Dark energy transition between quintessence and phantom regimes

- an equation of state analysis

Hrvoje Stefancic *0
Departament d' Estructura i Constituents de la Materia, Universitat de Barcelona
Av. Diagonal 647, 08028 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain

The dark energy transition between quintessence (w > —1) and phantom (w < —1) regimes (the
crossing of the cosmological constant boundary) is studied using the dark energy equation of state.
Models characterized by this type of transition are explicitly constructed and their equation of state
is found to be implicitly defined. The behavior of the more general models with the implicitly
defined equation of state, obtained by the generalization of the explicitly constructed models, is
studied to gain insight into the necessary conditions for the occurrence of the transition, as well as
to investigate the mechanism behind the transition. It is found that the parameters of the generalized
models need to satisfy special conditions for the transition to happen and that the mechanism behind
the transition is the cancellation of the contribution of the cosmological constant boundary. The
aspects of the behavior of the generalized models which are not related to the transition are briefly
discussed and the role of the implicitly defined dark energy equation of state in the description of
the dark energy evolution is emphasized.

PACS numbers: 04.20.Jb, 04.20.Dw, 98.80.Es; 98.80.Jk

Keywords: dark energy, equation of state, transition, quintessence, phantom

One of the most important aspects of the present uni-
verse is its accelerated expansion. Numerous and com-
plementary cosmological observations such as supernovae
of the type la (SNIa) Q, the anisotropies of the cosmic
microwave background radiation (CMBR) , large scale
structure (LSS) Q, and others seem to reconfirm this
characteristic of the small-redshift evolution of the uni-
verse with the arrival of each new set of cosmological
data. Although the present acceleration of the universe
expansion is well established observationally, the nature
of the cause of the cosmic acceleration is much more un-
certain. A large number of models assume the existence
of the component of the universe with the negative pres-
sure, named dark energy ,4], which at late times domi-
nates the total energy density of the universe and accel-
erates its expansion. Models of dark energy differ with
respect to the size of the parameter w = Pd/ Pd (pd and
Pd are the pressure and energy density of dark energy,
respectively : ) of their equation of state (EOS) as well as
the variation of the parameter w with redshift or cosmic
time. The cosmological constant (CC), with w = —I, oc-
cupies the central place among the dark energy models,
both in theoretical considerations and in data analysis
The conceptual difficulties in the understanding of
the measured size of the CC and its relation to other cos-
mological parameters motivated the study of the dynami-

*On leave of absence from the Theoretical Physics Division, Rudjer
Boskovic Institute, Zagreb, Croatia.
^Electronic address: stefancic@ecm.ub.es

1 Since only the dark energy component of the universe will be
discussed furtheron, in the remainder of the paper the subscript
d will be dropped.

cal models of CC (such as renormalization group running
models of CC and other relevant cosmological parameters
[E IE H> 0) an d dynamical models of dark energy in gen-
eral. The models of dark e nerg y with w > — 1 comprise
quintessence |lfj| . k- essence and Chaplygin gas |12| .
among others. On the other side of the CC boundary,
characterized by w < — 1, lie phantom models of dark en-
ergy, recently intensively studied in [r^ll^[lH[Tri[r^ |(for
an intersting explanation of superaccelerated expansion
without phantom components, see |l8j|). The second im-
portant direction in the study of the present acceleration
of the universe explains it in terms of the modifications of
the gravitational interaction at cosmological scales 0] .

Although there exist different approaches to the prob-
lem of the acceleration of the universe, the concept of
dark energy is especially useful and most widely used.
Namely, the dynamics of the universe in the approaches
which do not assume the existence of dark energy can
still be described in terms of dark energy, which in this
case becomes an effective description. In this paper we
model specific aspects of the expansion of the universe in
the framework of dark energy, which may be either a fun-
damental cosmic component or an effective description of
some alternative mechanism causing the acceleration of
the universe.

The formalism of this paper is formulated in terms of
the dark energy EOS. The usual formulation of the dark
energy EOS is given in terms of p — p(p) where p is
some analytic function of p. This form of dark energy
EOS may be inappropriate for the study of some effects
related to dark energy. Therefore we adopt a more gen-
eral approach in which we consider parametrically de-
fined dark energy EOS as a pair of functions (p(t),p(t))
or (p(a),p(a)) where t is the cosmic time and a is the

2

scale factor of the universe. The parameter of dark en-
ergy EOS can also be defined in a straightforward man-
ner. This definition is general enough to describe the
behavior of large classes of dark energy, irrespectively of
their internal degrees of freedom, i.e. their more detailed
formulation.

Within the description of dark energy in terms of the
EOS as defined in the preceding paragraph, it is possible
to address a problem which has recently drawn a lot of at-
tention of researchers in both observation al 1 201 and the-
oretical cosmology [2l|, |23, |23|, Hj, |2f| Ha H2| : a possible
dark energy transition between quintessence and phantom
regimes. The analyses of various cosmological data sets
|20| mildly favor the evolution of the dark energy param-
eter of EOS from w > — 1 to it; < — lat small redshift. It
is important to stress that there is no decisive indication
for this type of transition from the data and there are
other models (especially the benchmark KCDM model)
which are consistent with the presently available cosmo-
logical data. However, should the future, more precise
and abundant cosmological data confirm the existence of
the aforementioned type of transition, the theoretical un-
derstanding of this phenomenon will become necessary.
The transition from quintessence to phantom regime of
the behavior of dark energy is also theoretically favor-
able. Namely, since the energy density of phantom en-
ergy grows with the expansion of the universe, the co-
incidence problem is for phantom energy even more se-
rious than for the CC. However, if at early times the
dark energy has the quintessence character (w > —1)
and only at some (relatively) small redshift transits to
phantom, the coincidence problem is substantially allevi-
ated. The quintessence-like behavior up to the transition
makes possible the development of models which incor-
porate the feature that the quintessence energy density
may track energy densities of other components of the
universe. Moreover, the theoretical description of the
CC boundary transition unifies aspects of many differ-
ent classes of dark energy models (such as quintessence,
phantom and CC models) and represents a challenge of
substantial theoretical importance. A number of theo-
retical studies of the crossing of CC boundary have been
undertaken so far. The approach of 0, |22] (see also
(2j|) models the dark energy in terms of two fields, of
which one is of quintessence and the other of phantom
type. An interesting phcnomcnological model of oscil-
latory parameter w, named quintom pij . exhibits very
interesting features in the evolution of the universe. In
the k-essence single scalar field models it has been shown
that the evolution of quintessence to phantom is unlikely
|25j| . but the addition of higher-derivative kinetic terms
in the single scalar field action can reproduce the tran-
sition between the quintessence and phantom regimes of
dark energy [2fil | . A possible imprint of this transition on
cosmological perturbations, along with other aspects of
the transition, was studied in |27j .

In this paper we search for the dark energy EOS (un-
derstood in the sense defined above) which allows for the

transition to occur and we study the conditions for the
transition within the generalized classes of dark energy
models. Some interesting results on the CC boundary
crossing using the dark energy EOS have been obtained
in [28|. For the dark energy EOS in which p is defined
explicitly in terms of p

P=-P~f(p), (1)
the parameter of the dark energy EOS is given by

w = -l-f(p)/p. (2)

Let us assume that the transition between the
quintessence and phantom regimes happens at the dark
energy density p*. Then at the point of transition the
function / must vanish, /(p*) — 0, and needs to change
sign at the same value of the dark energy density. The
equation of the energy-momentum tensor conservation

da

dp + 3(p + pj —
a

(3)

yields the following expression for the evolution of the
dark energy density towards the point of transition

du

W)

= 3 In

(4)

Since we wish to describe the crossing of the CC bound-
ary at finite values of the scale factor (i.e. redshifts), the
function l//(u) must be integrable in the considered in-
terval of p. The specified requirements put considerable
constraints on the form of allowable functions /. One of
possibilities is that the function / is multivalued near the
point of transition p* psj . An acceptable possibility is
also f(p) ~ (p - p*) s , with < s < 1

In our concrete study of the transition phenomenon
we start from a simple expression for the evolution of the
dark energy density

P = C 1 [-

-3(1+7)

c 2 [ —

a Q

-3(1+1)

(5)

In the expression given above 7 > — 1 and r\ < — 1,
whereas C\ and C2 are positive constants. This expres-
sion resembles the sum of contributions of two indepen-
dent cosmological fluids with constant parameters of EOS
7 and 77. However, we consider (JjjJ to be the energy
density of a single cosmological component and we fur-
ther investigate its EOS. From the expression for the
dark energy pressure can be obtained in a straightforward
manner:

p = 7C1

c

-3(1+7)

VC 2

«o

-3(l+»))

The parameter of EOS acquires the form

. 3(7-7))

w =

■ Tl —

I w

wo ( _o_

-7) \a

w

-Wo f _a_\
-77 \ao )

3(7-7)) '

(6)

(7)

3

ln(a/a )

FIG. 1: The dependence of the dark energy parameter of
EOS w given by Q on the scale factor a for the present value
wo = —1.1 and three sets of parameters 7 and r\.

where wo denotes the present value of the parameter of
dark energy EOS. From the functional form Q it is clear
that for small values of the scale factor the parameter
w tends to 7 while for large values of the scale factor
it tends to rj and that it transits from one asymptotic
value to the other at some finite value of the scale factor.
The dependence of w on a/ao is given in Fig. ^ From
equations GJ and J7J it can be seen that the constants G\
and C2 can be expressed in terms of the present values
of the dark energy density po and the parameter of EOS
wo- Since J5J and (jSJ are essentially linear combinations
of power terms in a/ao, it is possible to eliminate the
scale factor in the following way

-3

1P-P
(7 - v)Ca

1/(1+'?)

p-yp
(7 - v)Ci

1/(1+7)

(8)

which finally leads to the EOS for the dark energy model
(EH

p-yp

1P-P

(l+7)/(l+»j)

(9)

In the procedure described above we have constructed
the EOS for a well motivated and simple example. The
obtained EOS has some features which distinguish it from
the dark energy equations of state considered in the liter-
ature so far. The most important one is that, for general
values 7 > — 1 and 77 < —1, the EOS is implicitly defined
and generally it is not possible to obtain a closed form
analytic expression p — p(p) .

The features of the dark energy EOS constructed above
motivate us to consider more general implicitly defined
equations of state. A natural generalization of EOS ©
is given by

Ap + Bp= (Cp + Dpf

(10)

where A, B, C, and D are real coefficients and we con-
sider the case a ^ 1 since for a = 1 (|10fl becomes an

EOS with a constant parameter w. Since © is a special
case of (I1U|I . we know that the general model necessar-
ily includes some parameter sets which describe the dark
energy transiting from the quintessence to the phantom
regime. A natural question before the detailed consid-
erations of the model i|l(J|) is whether all parameter sets
lead to the transition. The answer to this question is
negative. Namely, for D = the model, with a suitable
choice of parameters A, B, and C, acquires the form
p = — p — Kp s which was studied in detail in [2^ and
[28| . This model exhibits many interesting effects, but
its parameter w remains either on the quintessence or
the phantom side during the evolution of the universe.
Therefore, the model has some parts of the parameter
space in which transition occurs and some in which it
does not occur. Since the model defined by (|10|) contains
a number of parameters, in our considerations we shall
focus on those parameter values which allow the study
of the quintessence-phantom transition. From (|ll)fl it is
straightforward to obtain the expression for p in terms of
the EOS parameter w:

{C + Dw) a ^ 1 -^
(A + Bw) 1/(1-")

(11)

We further introduce the parameters E = A/B and F —
C/D. Combining the equation with the evolution
law (0 we obtain the following equation for the evolution
of the parameter w with the scale factor a:

1

[F + w)(l + w) (E + w)(l + w)

da

dw = 3(a— 1) — .

a

(12)

The functional form of the solution of this differential
equation depends on whether some of the coefficients E
and F equals 1 or not. For the case when E ^ 1 and
F^l, the solution of 112fl acquires the form

w -

F

w + F
1 + w

a/(l-F)

W

E

w

wo + E

1/(1-B)- Q /(1-_F)

-l/(l-£)

3(a-l)

(13)

This solution reveals interesting aspects of the evolution
of w with the expansion of the universe. The values — 1,
—E, and — F of the parameter w can generally be reached
only for the asymptotic values of the scale factor a, i.e.
a — > or a — > 00, depending on the concrete numerical
values of parameters a, E, and F. The values —1, — E
and — F therefore represent the boundaries that cannot
be crossed, whenever these boundaries exist in the prob-
lem. The evolution of the parameter w with the scale of
the universe a is always confined into one of the intervals
obtained by the division of the w axis with the points —1,
— E, and — F. The interval within which the parameter
w evolves is determined by the choice of the present-time
value wo- For the choice of parameters as in this case,
E 7^ 1 and f / 1, these boundaries can be removed by

the choice of the parameter a. The boundary at w = —F
is removed when a = and the boundary at w = — E
is removed when a — > ±00. The most interesting case is
the possibility of removing the boundary at w = — 1. It
is achieved for a cross = ( 1 — F)/(l — E). This choice gives
the transition from w > — 1 to w < — 1, i.e. the crossing
of the CC boundary. The equation then acquires
the form

w + F

w

F

w + E

w

E

3(E-F)

(14)

The parameter w smoothly varies between the asymp-
totic values w = —E and w = —F. In the case when
E = 1 and F^l the solution of (O is

x e

w + F

a/(l

-F)

1 -

h w

-a/(l-F)

wo + F

u

- w

Va 0y

3(a-l)

-1/(1-

\-wo)

(15)

This solution demonstrates that the choice of a that
could remove the CC boundary does not exist. There-
fore, in this case we cannot obtain the transition between
quintessence and phantom regimes. For E ^ 1 and F = 1
the solution has the form

-a(l/(l+w)-l/(l+«; ))

w + E

-1/(1-E)

1 + w

1/(1-.E)

1 + w

(fflo)

wo + E

3(a-l)

(16)

and as in the preceding case the crossing of the CC
boundary cannot be achieved by a suitable choice of a.
Finally, when both coefficients equal 1, i.e. E — 1 and
F = 1, we obtain the following solution:

w = — 1

1 + w

1 - 3(1 + w ) ln(a/ao)

(17)

This solution does not depend on a and cannot describe
the transition between the quintessence and phantom
regimes as well. The relations (|13|) to (|17|) show that the
evolution of the parameter w for the generalized model
HI U| l can be expressed in the closed form and that the
generalized model (|1(J|1 is highly analytically tractable.

The equation l|12[) can be rearranged to provide some
further insight into the mechanism of the CC boundary
crossing. Namely, it can be written as

w -

iE-F

da

^ ■ — w rdw = 3

(F + w)(E + w)(l + w) a

(18)

From the equation given above it is evident that, apart
from zeros of the denominator of the expression on the
left-hand side of the equation at w = — 1, w — —E, and
w = —F, the numerator of the same expression has a
zero at w» = —(aE — F)/(a — 1). This form of the

FIG. 2: The scaling of the parameter w with a for the model
for three typical values a = 1.5, a — 1, and a = 0.5 in
the interval a > 0. The parameter values used are wo = —1.1,
E — 0.6 and F = 1.3. The values of the parameter w* are
0.8, 00, —2 for a — 1.5, 1,0.5 respectivelly, and are outside
the interval (— F, — 1).

equation governing the evolution of w casts additional
light on the possible removal of the boundaries associ-
ated with the zeros of the denominator of the expression
on the left hand side. Namely, when w* equals one of the
zeros of the denominator, there is the cancellation of the
terms in denominator and numerator which removes this
zero from the denominator and the boundary associated
with this zero of the denominator is not present in the
solution for w. In this way we can see that w* = — F
for a — 0, w* = —E for a — » ±00, and w* = —1 for
a cross = (1 — F)/(l — E). In this way we confirm the
results obtained by the analysis of the solution l|13|) • The
conclusion is that the mechanism behind the crossing of
any of the boundaries w — —1, w = —E, and w = — F is
the cancellation of terms in the numerator and denomi-
nator of the expression on the left-hand side of {THJ.

The equation l|18|) . apart from the described insight
into the crossing mechanism, provides additional infor-
mation on the behavior of the general model (|10|l which
cannot be easily obtained from the solutions l|13|) to i|17fl •
Namely, from (|18fl it is possible to obtain the solution in
the very vicinity of w* which has the form

7(6£)

(19)

where

L =

(a iy

:(F-Ef(a(l-E)-(l-F)). (20)

Here a* is the value of the scale factor which corre-
sponds to the EOS parameter value w — w». The ex-
pression (|T§|| is valid when w» is different from —1, — E,
or —F, i.e. when no cancellation mechanism is at work.
Depending on whether L is positive or negative, the ex-
pression i|19[l describes the evolution of the universe with
a minimal or a maximal value of the scale factor a* which

ln(a/a ) ln(a/a Q )

FIG. 3: The dependence of the parameter w on a for the
model lllOI for two typical values for a in the interval (1 —
F)/(l — E) < a < 0. The parameter values used are wo =
— 1.1, E = 0.6 and F = 1.3. The values of the parameter w*
are —1.18 and —1.04 for a = —0.2 and —0.6, respectivelly,
and are within the interval (— F, — 1).

is reached when w — w*. Therefore, u>* is, apart from —1,
—E and — F, the fourth typical value for w which deter-
mines the behavior of the model. The principal difference
compared to the first three values is that w* depends on
a and, for fixed E and F, a determines where will be
placed.

As already stated, the crossing of the CC boundary
can be realized only for E ^ 1 and F ^ 1. Moreover,
the values —E and — F must be on the opposite sides
of the CC boundary. In this setting we are interested
to find those a values for which is situated in the
intervals between — F and —1 or between — E and —1.
Four possible cases with the corresponding intervals of a
are:

F > -w* > 1 > E
F > 1 > -w* > E
E > -w* > 1 > F
E > 1 > -w* > F

(l-F)/(l-E) <a<0,
a<[l-F)/{l-E),
a<(l-F)/(l-E),
(\-F)/(l-E) <a< 0(21)

Let us consider in detail the behavior of the model
as a is decreased from very large positive values toward
very negative values for the case F > —Wq > I > E.
For a > 1, w — » —1 when a — > while w — > —F when
a — > oo. For a = 1, w = wq, and for < a < 1, w — * —F
when a — > and w — > — 1 when a — ► oo. The scaling of w
with a for these a values is depicted in Fig. [21 F° r ce — 0,
the EOS becomes the generalized linear EOS studied in
detail in [3(| and the boundary at w = —F is removed.
For (1 — F)/(l — E) < a < the parameter K7* enters the
interval (— F, — 1). The form of the dependence of w on
a is determined by the relation of and u>o- Namely,
the w(a) function has a different form for < wq and
w* > wq as can be seen from Fig. [21 The evolution of the
parameter w in this interval of a implies the existence of

FIG. 4: The parameter w as a function of a for a = Q cross =
(1 — F)/(l — E). The parameter values used are wo = —1.1,
E — 0.6 and F = 1.3. The parameter w* equals —1. The
transition from iu>— 1 to lu < — lis nicely demonstrated.

the minimal value of the scale factor (the maximal value
of the redshift). Clearly, this interval of a is strongly
constrained by the cosmological observations. In order
to get a very small a* which could possibly be consis-
tent with the observational data, a value very close to
—F or —1 needs to be chosen for wq. However, in this
case during the most of the expansion of the universe
the behavior of w is practically indistinguishable from
the behavior of the dark energy with constant w = —F
or w — —1 (CC). For a = (wq + F)/(w + E), we have
a* = ao and = wq which is observationally completely
excluded. Clearly, this interval is of small observational
importance and it is discussed here for the sake of the ex-
position completeness. For a = a cross = (1 — F)/(l — E)
the transition between the quintessence and the phantom
regimes of dark energy occurs, as displayed in Fig. 0] Fi-
nally, for a < a cross , w — > — 1 when a — ► and w — > —F
when a — ► oo, as shown in Fig. [SJ

Next we describe the behavior of the model in the
parameter regime F > 1 > —wq > E considering a
values from very large positive to very negative ones.
For a > 1, w — ► — 1 when a — > and w — ► —E when
a — > oo. When a = 1, w = wq and for (1 — F)/(l — E) <
a < 1, w — * —E when a — > and w — > — 1 when
a — > oo. At a = a croS s = (1 — — E) the pa-

rameter w transits from — E to — F with the expan-
sion. For (w + F)/(w + E) < a < (1 - F)/(l - E),
w — > —E when a — > and w — > 10* when a — > a* > ao.
For a — (wq + F)/ (wq + E), we have if* = wq and
a* = ao which is also observationally excluded. Finally,
for a < (u>o + F)/(wq + E), w — > —1 when a — > and
w — » w* when a — > a* > ao. It is interesting to note that
some of the cases for a < (1 — F)/(l — E), characterized
by the maximal value of the scale factor reached in the
future, might be interesting in the studies of future sin-
gularities of the expansion of the universe
The behavior of the model in two remaining interesting

6

FIG. 5: The dependence of the parameter w on a for a <
(1 — F)/(l — E). The parameter values used are wo = —1-1,
E — 0.6 and F = 1.3. For the used value a — —1.5, the value
of the parameter w* equals —0.88 and is situated outside the
interval (— F, — 1).

cases E > —wq > 1 > F and E > 1 > — Wo > F may
be obtained from the results displayed above since the
model <|12l) is symmetric with respect to transformations
a <-» 1/a and E ^ F.

More general models, characterized by the transition
between the quintessence and phantom regimes, can be
explicitly constructed. Namely, the models of dark en-
ergy density given by

P=\Ci

-3(l+ 7 )/b

Co

-3(l+r))/bN

, (22)

characterized by an additional parameter b, exhibit the
crossing of the CC boundary. The dark energy pressure
becomes

VP

(i-b)/b

7d

0()

-3(l+ 7 )/6

vc 2

«0

-3(l+i))/b

and the parameter of dark energy EOS is

3(7-17)/*

7-

' u>o —

- f-V

^ , 7-hjq
io

— I — 1

3( 7 -n)/b

(23)

(24)

The behavior of the model depending on parameter b is
depicted in Fig. |B| The additional new feature obtained
by the introduction of the parameter b is the possibility
to describe the transitions in both directions with respect
to the asymptotic values of the parameter w, see Fig. [S]
Using the procedure applied to the model JSJ, we obtain
the dark energy EOS

p-yp
(7 - v)Ci

J(l-b)h-v))/m+v))

ip-p
(7 - v)c 2

(1+7)7(1+'?)

(25)

This dark energy EOS is, as in the case of the model J5J,
defined implicitly. A natural generalization of the model
is given by an EOS

Ap + Bp = (Cp + Dp) a (Mp + Npf , (26)

where A, B, C, D, M, N, a, and f3 are real parameters.
The dark energy density has the following dependence on
w.

_ f (g + Dw) a (M + Nwf \ W-"-®
9 ~ V A + Bw

(27)

Here we assume that a + f3 ^ 1. In the case when
a + j3 = 1 the equation l|27|) becomes an algebraical equa-
tion for the parameter w. The model is then a dark
energy model with a constant parameter of the EOS ob-
tained by solving the aforementioned algebraical equa-
tion. Inserting the expression for the energy density into
P|) we obtain the equation of evolution of the parameter
w with the scale factor a:

(3N

B

dw

C + Dw M + Nw A + BwJ 1

= 3(a + /3-l)— .

a

(28)

The solution of the equation given above for the most
interesting case A ^ B, C ^ D, and M ^ M gives the
expression for w in the closed form as

C + Dw

C-
1 -

-aDf(C-D)

M -

f Nw

-0N/(M~N)

M4

- TV wq

Dw

ctD/(C-D)+pN/{M-N)-B/{A-B)

w

A

Wq

F Bw

A + Bw

B/(A-B)

«0

3(a+/3-l)

(29)

This expression shows that it is possible to remove the
CC boundary if a special relation among the model pa-
rameters is imposed (which is essentially the requirement
that the exponent of the |1 + w\ term vanishes).

The models considered so far were either constructed
to exhibit the crossing of the CC boundary or obtained
as the generalizations of the explicitly constructed mod-
els. Therefore, in the case of models obtained as gener-
alizations of the constructed models, it is certain that at
least some combinations of model parameters yield the
transition. Based on the insight obtained in the study
of the dark energy models discussed so far, it is possible
to show that a dark energy model with a highly nontriv-
ial implicitly defined EOS also exhibits the crossing of
the CC boundary for some values of model parameters.
Namely, let us consider the EOS

2n+l , r>2n+l _ ( n 2n+l , n 2n+l\a

Bp z

Dp + y

(30)

where n > 0. The evolution equation for the EOS pa-
rameter w is

1+1 + (aE-F)/(a-l) w 2

(F-

- 1 ) 1 +

-dw

da

3-. 31

a

7

S -l

FIG. 6: The dependence of the parameter of the dark energy
EOS w on the scale factor of the universe a for the model
The positive values of the parameter 6 describe the transition
from 7 to rj with the expansion of the universe, whereas the
negative values for 6 describe the transition from rj to 7 as the
universe expands. The parameter values used are wo = —1-1,
7 = —0.7 and rj = —1.3.

The conditions for the occurrence of the transition are
met when a = (1-F)/(1-E), i.e. (aE-F)/(a- 1) = 1.
In this case we have a cancellation of the (w + 1) terms
between the w 2n+1 + 1 term in the numerator and the
w + 1 term in the denominator. Namely,

w

2n+l , 2

10 + 1

(32)

2=0

Here the function £(w) has no real roots and therefore,
no additional analogue of w* can appear. The evolution
equation becomes

(F + w 2n+1 )(E-

„2n+l

W

2 dw

da

(33)

and it describes the smooth transitions of w between
_£i/(2«+i) and __pi/(2n+i)_ Therefore, the dark en-
ergy model with the implicitly defined EOS l|3U|l is ca-
pable of describing the dark energy transition between
quintessence and phantom regimes.

The main result of this paper is the demonstration that
it is possible to describe the crossing of the CC boundary
using the dark energy EOS only. The important and new
difference with respect to similar studies until now is that
the equations of state considered here are defined implic-
itly. The understanding of the dark energy EOS as para-
metrically defined (like a pair of quantities (p(t),p(t)))
certainly opens much larger possibilities in describing the
dark energy evolution and properties. The transition be-
tween w > — 1 and w < — 1 regimes of the dark energy
behavior is one of aspects that can be described in terms
of implicitly defined dark energy EOS.

Another aspect of the crossing of the CC boundary
in the framework of the implicitly defined dark energy

EOS is related to the conditions that must be fulfilled
for the transition to take place. In all studied models
which have not been explicitly constructed to yield the
transition, i.e. in generalized models, one parameter had
to have a special value determined by some function of re-
maining parameters. A deviation from this special value
prevents the occurrence of the transition. In other words,
if the parametric space of the model is D dimensional,
the set of parameter values which lead to the transition is
D — l dimensional (i.e. determined by 13 — 1 parameters).
Clearly, if no additional mechanism selected parameter
values that correspond to the transition, i.e. if all pa-
rameter combinations were equally likely, it could be said
that the transition of the CC boundary in the so far stud-
ied dark energy models with the implicitly defined EOS
is unlikely. However, only a couple of dark energy mod-
els with the implicitly defined EOS have been studied in
this paper. It remains to be seen whether a more suitable
implicitly defined dark energy EOS can make the transi-
tion more likely. It is important to stress that, although
it was not the main aim of this paper, the dark energy
models with the implicitly defined EOS studied in this
paper exhibit some additional interesting features and
effects. Namely, the generalized models like (|10|) exhibit
the smooth transitions between any two values which are
both less or bigger than -1. These transitions are, in the
sense of the discussion given in the preceding paragraph,
likely. Furthermore, the model (|10|l exhibits an intrigu-
ing behavior around u>* which could be interesting in the
study of (sudden) future singularities.

In conclusion, the dark energy transition between
quintessence and phantom regimes is studied in terms of
the EOS. The dark energy EOS for models explicitly con-
structed to exhibit the transition is found to be implicitly
defined. Several generalized implicitly defined dark en-
ergy EOS are studied to investigate the conditions which
are necessary for the occurrence of the transition. Within
the generalized models studied in this paper it is found
that special conditions need to be satisfied in order to
have a transition. The mechanism behind the transition
within the generalized models is related to the cancel-
lation of the contribution from the CC boundary. It is
important to emphasize that, once it has been shown that
the model with the implicitly defined EOS may describe
the crossing of the CC boundary, it is reasonable to inves-
tigate implicitly defined EOS which could describe other
interesting effects, such as a transient phantom phase. It
is also of interest to investigate other classes of dark en-
ergy models with the implicitly defined EOS to find out
whether the special conditions required for the transition
could be relaxed.

Acknowledgments. The author acknowledges the
support of the Secretaria de Estado de Universidades e
Investigation of the Ministerio de Education y Ciencia
of Spain within the program "Ayudas para movilidad de
Profesores de Universidad e Investigadores espaholes y
extranjeros" . This work has been supported in part by
MEC and FEDER under project 2004-04582-C02-01 and

8

by the Dep. de Recerca de la Generalitat de Catalunya would like to thank the Departament E.C.M. of the Uni-
under contract CIRIT GC 2001SGR-00065. The author versitat de Barcelona for the hospitality.

[1] A.G. Riess et al., Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009; S. Perl-
mutter et al., Astrophys. J. 517 (1999) 565; A.G. Riess
et al., Astrophys. J. 607 (2004) 665; RA. Knop et al.,
Astrophys. J. 598 (2003) 102.

[2] P. de Bernardis et al., Nature 404 (2000) 955; A.D. Miller
et al. Astrophys. J. Lett. 524 (1999) LI; S. Hanany et al.,
Astrophys. J. Lett. 545 (2000) L5; N.W. Halverson et al.,
Astrophys. J. 568 (2002) 38; B.S. Mason et al., Astro-
phys. J. 591 (2003) 540; D.N. Spergel et al., Astrophys.
J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175; L. Page et al., Astrophys. J.
Suppl. 148 (2003) 233.

[3] R. Scranton et al., astro- ph/0307335 M. Tegmark et al.,
Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 103501.

[4] P.J.E. Peebles, B. Ratra, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75 (2003) 559;
T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rept. 380 (2003) 235; T. Pad-
manabhan, astro- ph/041 1044

[5] S. Weinberg ^ Rev. Mod. Phy s. 61 (1989) 1; N.
Straumann, astro- ph/0203330 T. Padmanabhan,
hep-th/0406060

[6] I.L. Shapiro. J. Sola, Phys. Lett. B 475 (2000) 236; I.L.
Shapiro, J. Sola, JHEP 0202 (2002) 006; I.L. Shapiro, J.
Sola, C. Espana-Bonet, P. Ruiz-Lapuente, Phys. Lett. B
574 (2003) 149; C. Espana-Bonet, P. Ruiz-Lapuente, I.L.
Shapiro, J. Sola, JCAP 0402 (2004) 006.

[7] A. Babic, B. Guberina, R. Horvat, H. Stefancic, Phys.
Rev. D 65 (2002) 085002; B. Guberina, R. Horvat, H.
Stefancic, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 083001; A. Babic, B.
Guberina, R. Horvat, H. Stefancic, astro-ph/0407572 B.
Guberina, R. Horvat, H. Stefancic, astro-ph/0503495

[8] I.L. Shapiro, J. Sola, H. Stefancic, JCAP 0501 (2005)
012.

[9] A. Bonanno, M. Reuter, Phys. Lett. B 527 (2002) 9; E.
Bentivegna, A. Bonanno, M. Reuter, JCAP 0401 (2004)
001; F. Bauer, gr-qc/0501078
[10] B. Ratra, P.J.E. Peebles, Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 3406;
P.J.E. Peebles, B. Ratra, Astrophys. J. 325 (1988) L17;
C. Wetterich, Nucl. Phys. B 302 (1988) 668; RR. Cald-
well, R. Dave, P.J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998)
1582; I. Zlatev, L. Wang, P.J. Steinhardt, Phys Rev. Lett.
82 (1999) 896; M. Doran, J. Jaeckel, Phys. Rev. D 66
(2002) 043519.

[11] C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour, V. Mukhanov, Phys.
Lett. B 458 (1999) 209; T. Chiba, T. Okabe, M. Yam-
aguchi, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 023511.

[12] A. Yu. Kamenshchik, U. Moschella, V. Pasquier, Phys.
Lett. B511 (2001) 265; N. Bilic, GB. Tupper, RD. Viol-
lier, Phys. Lett. B 535 (2002) 17; M.C. Bento, O. Berto-
lami, A. A. Sen, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 043507; J.S. Al-
caniz, D. Jain, A. Dev, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 043514.

[13] RR. Caldwell, Phys. Lett. B 545 (2002) 23.

[14] B. Mclnnes, JHEP 0208 (2002) 029; S. Nojiri, SD.
Odintsov, Phys. Lett. B 562 (2003) 147; S. Nojiri, SD.
Odintsov, Phys. Lett B 565 (2003) 1; P. Singh, M. Sami,
N. Dadhich, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 023522; GW. Gib-
bons, |hep^th/0302199| L.P.Chimento, R. Lazkoz, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 211301; J.G. Hao, X.Z. Li, Phys.
Rev. D 68 (2003) 083514; Y-S. Piao, E. Zhou, Phys.

Rev. D 68 (2003) 083515; J.G. Hao, X.Z. Li Phys. Rev.
D 67 (2003) 107303; J.G. Hao, X.Z. Li, Phys. Rev. D
70 (2004) 043529; V. Faraoni, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003)
063508; V.B. Johri, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 041303; M.
Sami, A. Toporensky, Mod. Phys. Lett. A19 (2004) 1509;
E. Elizalde, J. Quiroga Hurtado, Mod. Phys. Lett. A19

(2004) 29; I. Brevik, S. Nojiri, SD. Odintsov, L. Vanzo,
Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 043520; P.F. Gonzalez-Diaz,
Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 063522; J.M. Aguirregabiria, L.P.
Chimento, R. Lazkoz, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 023509; E.
Elizalde, S. Nojiri, SD. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004)
043539; L.P. Chimento, R. Lazkoz, astro-ph/0405518
P.H. Frampton, T. Takahashi, Astropart. Phys. 22 (2004)
307; P.F. Gonzalez-Diaz, C.L. Siguenza, Nucl. Phys. B
697 (2004) 363; S.D.H. Hsu, A. Jenkins, M.B. Wise,
Phys. Lett. B 597 (2004) 270; P. Scherrer, Phys. Rev.
D 71 (2005) 063519; S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rev.
D 70 (2004) 103522; R.-G. Cai, A. Wang, JCAP 0503

(2005) 002; M. Sami, A. To porensky, P.V. Tretjakov, S.
Tsujikawa, hep-th/050 4154|

[15] H. Stefancic, Phys. Lett. B 586 (2004) 5; H. Stefancic,

Eur. Phys. J. C 36 (2004) 523.
[16] S.M. Carroll, M. Hoffman, M. Trodden, Phys. Rev. D

68 (2003) 023509; J.M. Cline, S. Jeon, GD. Moore,

Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 043543; A. Lue, GD. Starkman,

Phys.Rev. D70 (2004) 101501; S.M. Carroll, A. De Felice,

M. Trodden, Phys. Re v D 71 (200 5) 023525; C. Csaki,

N. Kaloper, J. Terning, astro-ph/0409596
[17] RR. Caldwell, M. KamionkowskX" W.N. Weinberg,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 071301; S. Nesseris, L.

Perivolaropoulos, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 123529.
[18] V.K. Onemli, R.P. Woodard, Class. Quant. Grav. 19

(2002) 4607; V.K. Onemli, R.P. Woodard, Phys. Rev.

D70 (2004) 107301; T. Brunier, V.K. Onemli, R.P.

Woodard, Class. Quant. Grav. 22 (2005) 59.
[19] G. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B 485

(2000) 208; V. Sahni, Y. Shtanov, JCAP 0311 (2003) 014;

S.M. Carroll, A. De Felice, V. Duvvuri, DA. Easson, M.

Trodden, M.S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 063513;

K. Freese, M. Lewis, Phys. Lett. B 540 (2002) 1; S. Nojiri,

SD. Odintsov, M. Sasaki, hep-th/0504052
[20] A. Melchiorri, L. Mersini, C.J. Odman, M. Trodden,

Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 043509; U. Alam, V. Sahni, TD.

Saini, A. A. Starobinsky, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 354

(2004) 275; U. Alam, V. Sahni, A. A. Starobinsky, JCAP
0406 (2004) 008; J.S. Alcaniz, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004)
083521; T. Roy Choudhury, T. Padmanabhan, Astron.
Astrophys. 429 (2005) 807; S. Hannestad, E. Mortsell,
JCAP 0409 (2004) 001; A. Upadhye, M. Ishak, P.J. Stein-
hardt. astro-ph/0411803 H.K. Jassal, J.S. Bagla, T. Pad-
manabhan, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. Letters, L11-L16

(2005) 356; R. Lazkoz, S. Nesseris, L. Perivolaropoulos,
astro-ph/0503230 S. Hannestad, astro-ph/0504017 C.
Espana-Bonet, P. Ruiz-Lapuente, hep-ph/0503210

[21] W. Hu, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 047301.
[22] Z.-K. Guo, Y.-S. Piao, X. Zhang, Y.-Z. Zhang, Phys.
Lett. B 608 (2005) 177; X.-F. Zhang, H. Li, Y.-S. Piao,

9

X. Zhang, astro-ph/0501652
[23] Y.-H. Wei, Y. Tian, Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) 5347;

H. Wei, R.-G. Cai, hep-th/0501160
[24] B. Feng, X.-L. Wang, X. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 607

(2005) 35; B. Feng. M. Li, Y.-S. Piao, X. Zhang,

astro-ph/0407432 J.-Q. Xia, B. Feng, X. Zhang,

|astro-ph/041150l|
[25] A. Vikman, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 023515.
[26] M. Li, B. Feng, X. Zhang, hep-ph/0503268
[27] R.R. Caldwell, M. Doran, astro-ph/050lT04]
[28] S. Nojiri, S.D. Odintsov, S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 71

(2005) 063004.

[29] H. Stefancic, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 084024.

[30] E. Babichev, V. Dokuchaev, Yu. Eroshenko, Class.
Quant. Grav. 22 (2005) 143;

[31] J.D. Barrow, Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) L79.

[32] K. Lake, Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) L129; J.D. Bar-
row, Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) 5619; L. Fernandez-
Jambrina, R. Lazkoz, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 121503;
J.D. Barrow, C.G. Tsagas, Class. Quant. Grav. 22 (2005)
1563; V. Gorini, A. Kamenshchik, U. Moschella, V.
Pasquier, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 123112; Y. Shtanov,
V. Sahni, Class. Quant. Grav. 19 (2002) L101.